|
Post by junior1 on Dec 22, 2014 16:50:23 GMT -5
Have heard the argument that a 5-1 allows a player to take on an important team role without getting out of the flow, the feel and/or the zone for several plays. A 6-2, where cold players enter the court and have to perform such a key role leads to a few errors of rhythm... that don't occur when the same person is engaged on the court without interruption.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 22, 2014 16:59:27 GMT -5
To win with a 6-2 I think you need a pin hitter who can pass half of the court and score freely in the front row and you need two similar setters, RS's who can impact the game in 3 rotations (hitting and blocking), as well as the same elite MH and Libero you'd need in the 5-1. It's not that easy. Which pretty much described Washington's team this year.
|
|
|
Post by bownlovingfreak on Dec 22, 2014 17:01:34 GMT -5
I think its hard to get your hitters into a rhythm and feeling confident. Most 6-2's I've seen usually include a big clunky hitter, who really isn't effective. Just imagine trying to feed 6 different hitters and make them happy. Someone must always feel left out!
|
|
|
Post by aztecbuff on Dec 22, 2014 17:15:22 GMT -5
Definitely interested in this topic going forward as a Colorado Buff fan, as this was the 1st year they used the 6-2, and neither of their setters this year had height issues (6' and 2 years as a 5-1 setter (and decent blocker) in the Pac, and a 6'3" freshman who was also a front row RS) to make THAT the reason to go to the 6-2 (1st time in the ~10 years I've been following the Buffs they'd used the 6-2).
The Buffs seem to possibly be into the 6-2 (or 4-2?) going forward , though. In an interview after their 2015 recruiting class was announced, the Asst. Coach/ recruiting coordinator mentioned one possibility was that, after Nicole Edelman graduates next year, they may be grooming their incoming freshman 6'4" right side to also be a setter, so the Buffs could end up with 6'3" and 6'4" setters (and right sides when in the front row) in a 6-2 (or is that the 4-2?) in 2016.
|
|
|
Post by thegrowler on Dec 22, 2014 17:17:12 GMT -5
I will say the best 6-2 we saw all season was at Washington. We won't know what could have been but historically and recently the National Champions of the sport have run a 5-1 offense when is the last time if ever a team has won te NC while running a 6-2 offense. I personally hate the 6-2 and why run it when looking at results it doesn't pay off. Of the Four Final Four squads this season only one that ran the 6-2 was Texas. I get that coaches with undersized setters are forced into running this system but I don't really like it. Do you guys think we will see a 6-2 get the NC anytime soon? Texas in 2009 was very close to winning it with 6-2. Then glass, hodge, brown and Wilson woke up.
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Dec 22, 2014 18:40:52 GMT -5
When PSU runs a 6-2 next year let's revisit this. Why would they do that when they are so effective with the slide plays with their middles?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Dec 22, 2014 19:05:32 GMT -5
When PSU runs a 6-2 next year let's revisit this. Why would they do that when they are so effective with the slide plays with their middles? There is no reason you can't run a slide with the middle in a 6-2. It's just not done very often because you usually have better options.
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Dec 22, 2014 19:08:40 GMT -5
Why would they do that when they are so effective with the slide plays with their middles? There is no reason you can't run a slide with the middle in a 6-2. It's just not done very often because you usually have better options. It's usually done with a crossing pattern in a 6-2 though, cuz i mean where else is the right side going to go to be available to hit etc? Never seen the middle run a slide alone in a 6-2. Not that it impossible i suppose. but you don't run crossing patterns all the time cuz you need a reasonable expectation of a perfect pass,whereas you can run the slide even off the net in a 5-1. Simple is also better than complicated all the time as well probably another reason.
|
|
|
Post by kro2488 on Dec 22, 2014 19:17:38 GMT -5
And i'm going to say what I was going to originally when I first saw this thread, it's not about what system a team runs that determines success but how consistent the players are in executing the game plan of the coaches and playing well etc... A team could win the championship running a 5-1 or 6-2, if they can pass and dig and block and everything else how they need to to win.
|
|
|
Post by truffleshuffle on Dec 22, 2014 19:36:28 GMT -5
I will say the best 6-2 we saw all season was at Washington. We won't know what could have been but historically and recently the National Champions of the sport have run a 5-1 offense when is the last time if ever a team has won te NC while running a 6-2 offense. I personally hate the 6-2 and why run it when looking at results it doesn't pay off. Of the Four Final Four squads this season only one that ran the 6-2 was Texas. I get that coaches with undersized setters are forced into running this system but I don't really like it. Do you guys think we will see a 6-2 get the NC anytime soon? Texas in 2009 was very close to winning it with 6-2. Then glass, hodge, brown and Wilson woke up. I think Texas was running a 1-2 in that match. I say that because I don't remember 6 hitters in that match, I only remember Hooker getting what seemed like 200 swings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2014 19:36:55 GMT -5
USC in what, 2003? Something like that, IIRC. I guess we'll never know how much of a difference it made, but obviously in the tournament we didn't see the same Washington team that beat Stanford, so we don't know whether they would have gone farther with Beals or not. The thing is, the change in the sub rules now favors the 6-2, if you have the hitters to make use of it. It's not really about having smaller setters, it's about having four hitters (two of which can pass well enough that you don't miss having a DS). The hitters have to be able to adapt to multiple setters and have blocking that adds more benefit than whatever you lose between your best setter and your second best setter. But really, based on the same evidence you are saying no 6-2 can win a title, you might as well just say that nobody but Penn State can win a title. I think that second rule should be adopted. I second Mike's motion. All in favor?
|
|
|
Post by akbar on Dec 22, 2014 20:02:05 GMT -5
USC in what, 2003? Something like that, IIRC. I guess we'll never know how much of a difference it made, but obviously in the tournament we didn't see the same Washington team that beat Stanford, so we don't know whether they would have gone farther with Beals or not. The thing is, the change in the sub rules now favors the 6-2, if you have the hitters to make use of it. It's not really about having smaller setters, it's about having four hitters (two of which can pass well enough that you don't miss having a DS). The hitters have to be able to adapt to multiple setters and have blocking that adds more benefit than whatever you lose between your best setter and your second best setter. But really, based on the same evidence you are saying no 6-2 can win a title, you might as well just say that nobody but Penn State can win a title. I think that second rule should be adopted. I second Mike's motion. All in favor? Aye.
|
|
|
Post by bbjrcoach on Dec 22, 2014 20:11:05 GMT -5
Big Daddy Don Shaw ran the best 6-2 in the history of the women's game IMO. Yes a long time ago, but it was special. Of course so were its Setter/Hitters Sharpley and Wendell. Hebert ran a heck of a 6-2 all the way to the finals too. The thing both of these 6-2's had in common? The setters also attacked at a very high level. Not what we see today. Can someone remind for me the names of the two setter/hitters that ran the Gophers team I'm talking about? They were really fun to watch.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2014 20:13:57 GMT -5
I think that second rule should be adopted. I second Mike's motion. All in favor? Aye. Not hearing any negative votes, motion is carried. This does make choice of Final Sites easier, as it will now be the Final One. I'd say either State College or Philly.
|
|
|
Post by Ralph Kramden on Dec 22, 2014 20:14:01 GMT -5
One of the most compelling reasons against running a 6-2 is that most if not all of the top tier setters just don't want to play in that system. It goes against their personality as leaders, it means leaving the floor- (which they hate)- and often the hitters "know" who the 1 setter is which can cause some morale issues.
I have often wondered if Edelman would have committed to Colorado had she known that she would end up in a 6-2 system this year. Would Bugg have ended up at Stanford or Hancock at PSU if they were going to play in a 6-2? I HIGHLY doubt it.
There may be some girls who are OK in a 6-2 like the setters at WA, but even there I wonder if Beals knew that she would be in a 6-2 for 4 years? Also makes me wonder if Tanner was recruited/promised to be in a Setter/RS hitter role at WA until the injury.
|
|